<< BE AFRAYED ~ MAIN ~ PUBLIC DOESN'T APPROVE >>

GOTTA GET HOT TO PLAY REAL COOL

Global warming is blamed for a coming ice age. Maybe we could halt this by reducing the amount of greenhouse gases we produce, thus causing the earth to get ... colder. Which is what we’re trying to avoid. Okay, instead let’s increase greenhouse gas outputs so that we’ll all be safe and warm. Hang on; warming is wrong, too!

To hell with it. Let’s line up some martinis here and get Friday night happening already.

Posted by Tim B. on 12/09/2005 at 02:05 AM
  1. So this is humour too?

    Posted by Ender on 2005 12 09 at 03:17 AM • permalink

  2. “Oh, humor!  arr arr arr arr arr!”

    http://www.flintrugby.net/80s Personalities/mork.jpg]Mork From Ork[/url]

    Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 2005 12 09 at 03:25 AM • permalink

  3. The last shutdown, [of the warm currents] which prompted a temperature drop of 5°C to 10°C in western Europe, was probably at the end of the last ice age, 12,000 years ago. There may also have been a slowing of Atlantic circulation during the Little Ice Age, which lasted sporadically from 1300 to about 1850 and created temperatures low enough to freeze the River Thames in London.
    Journal reference: Nature (vol 438, p 655).

    Archaeological excavations confirm that this late paleolithic shutdown was caused by the industrial excesses of the mammoth-oil pumping waspish proto-bushistas of North America, the selfish profit seeking ecological vandals who, at the same time,  were also grossly insensitive and exploitative in their relationship with peaceful, multicultural, Gaia-loving, UN-adoring, lotus-eating hordettes of Africa, Asia and South America.

    Posted by tmciolek on 2005 12 09 at 03:31 AM • permalink

  4. Oh, shut up, Ender. We’ve been ‘round and ‘round with you on this before ad nauseum. If you can’t see the humor in the complete absurdity of what Tim is relaying, it’s because you’ve got a deathgrip on that mass of contradiction.

    Posted by Dave S. on 2005 12 09 at 03:32 AM • permalink

  5. “...you’ve got a deathgrip on that mass of contradiction. “

    Jeez, Dave, I’m just going to bed, and now I have to deal with this image you put in my head.  Heatless bastard!

    Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 2005 12 09 at 03:36 AM • permalink

  6. Yes, I meant “heatless”, not “heartless”.  There’s an ice age coming, after all.  At least we’ll have plenty of ice for the martinis. 

    But is there enough vermouth?

    Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 2005 12 09 at 03:37 AM • permalink

  7. Why isn’t it funny that greens are so intellectually and morally poverty-stricken that they now say that no matter what happens, it’s global warming? It’s as funny as saying that no matter what happens, it’s Bush’s fault. I mean, that’s funny, Dude. It’s called irony. I-r-o-n-y.

    Oh, wait. I get it. Sorry. Irony’s dead. Nothing is funny. Hang it up, Tim. This blog’s so over.

    Posted by ekw on 2005 12 09 at 04:00 AM • permalink

  8. Don’t forget, in the mind of a swampy, “Global warming can mean colder; it can mean dryer; it can mean wetter.” But then again, they think countries who signed Kyoto and increased their CO2 emissions are more virtuous who didn’t and reduced their emissions.

    Posted by lil varmint on 2005 12 09 at 04:08 AM • permalink

  9. The problem is that temperature isn’t real.

    It’s a mathematical fiction, the derivative of internal energy with respect to entropy.

    In short, it’s whatever two systems in contact come to the same to of, if entropy is to be maximized..

    The law expressed, after all the tautologies are eliminated, is : eventually, things settle down.

    This is where beer comes in.

    Posted by rhhardin on 2005 12 09 at 04:11 AM • permalink

  10. Please treat Ender as we all would any person who abuses hospitality.

    Posted by blogstrop on 2005 12 09 at 05:29 AM • permalink

  11. #9 My brain hurts. I need a martini after that, with extra vodka and even ice.

    Can’t have the planet warming too quickly now, can we?

    Hell, I’m sober, haven’t had a real drink in days and I still can’t get my head around this global climate warming down and out thingy.

    Posted by Nilknarf Arbed on 2005 12 09 at 05:53 AM • permalink

  12. blogstrop - “Please treat Ender as we all would any person who abuses hospitality.”

    How have I abused hospitality?

    Posted by Ender on 2005 12 09 at 07:30 AM • permalink

  13. Hey, even if the post wasn’t that funny, the Three Little Bops reference raised a smile.  One great cartoon.

    Posted by Brett_McS on 2005 12 09 at 08:12 AM • permalink

  14. How have I abused hospitality?

    By being an officious, humorless bore on more than one occasion.

    Posted by Andrea Harris, Administrator on 2005 12 09 at 08:19 AM • permalink

  15. High class place with a high class crowd, sign on the door “No Wolves Allowed”

    Posted by Just passing by on 2005 12 09 at 09:03 AM • permalink

  16. Yes I know the above was humour, and I too enjoy humour, which is why, on occasion, more often than not, I use humour, to varying degrees of success (usually I quote Simpsons lines). But it is also a great example of false positioning (again, albeit an intentional one for the purpose of satire and a wry smile). False Positioning

    Posted by Humblogger (the Younger) on 2005 12 09 at 09:13 AM • permalink

  17. No blood for vermouth!

    Posted by trexkilla on 2005 12 09 at 09:44 AM • permalink

  18. Of course, you should be aware that it is men who cause global warming, not women.

    Women just suffer the consequences, you see!

    Posted by Kaboom on 2005 12 09 at 09:45 AM • permalink

  19. Well, Humblogger, if you don’t like it, you’re welcome to take your boring pedantry elsewhere. Maybe you and Ender should have a “those benighted fools” colloquy and leave us alone.

    Posted by Andrea Harris, Administrator on 2005 12 09 at 09:45 AM • permalink

  20. 18: Hilarious article, Kaboom! Probably true, though, to some degree, but for different reasons than those considered by Professor Rohr. I believe men consume more franks and beans than women, not to mention burritos, garbage pizzas, and so forth, so the male contribution to methane is disproportionately large. I guess the answer is for the rest of you guys to become vegetarians (I have a “carnivore dispensation” from Rove, countersigned by Rumsfeld).

    Posted by paco on 2005 12 09 at 10:22 AM • permalink

  21. Words to look up in the dictionary:

    1.  officious
    2.  entropy
    3.  colloquy
    4.  tautology

    I wonder, should I use my Strine dictionary?

    Posted by wronwright on 2005 12 09 at 10:29 AM • permalink

  22. By being an officious, humorless bore on more than one occasion.

    Andrea, I think you mean humorless Borg since Ender has already been assimilated.

    Posted by Some0Seppo on 2005 12 09 at 10:29 AM • permalink

  23. I pray you are just being sarcastic and I’m missing it because I haven’t had my coffee yet.

    Yes, the Greenies are stupid and sending society back to the stone age because we are changing the climate (like every other global species has done in the past - right back to those damn microbes that poisoned the atmosphere by flooding it with oxygen) is a very dumb idea.

    However, it’s pretty obvious that they aren’t concerned about global warming because they don’t like the warmth. They are concerned because they don’t like change, they want the climate to be “as it should” and conveniantly ignore the fact that it has never been stable in the past anyway.

    That warming up the oceans could slow or stop currents that are caused by cold water sinking and moving south seems a no brainer. That that cold water sinking is half of a cycle that brings warm water north seems simple too. That that warm water is what makes the western European climate so different from the eastern European climate at the same lattitude seems reasonable enough to take at face value.

    So warming could cause cooling in a particular region of the globe. Simple really.

    The Greenies don’t like that because it is a change and their precious Mother Earth can’t cope with change in their small minds.

    Not accepting that an overall increase in the temperature of the globe could cause some regions to get colder is just dumb. It’s something the Greenies are probably right about. The climate isn’t nice and linear after all.

    The point is that it doesn’t matter. Just build lots of nuclear plants and everyone should be happy… Or reap the benefits of shorter trans-atlantic shiopping times when that ice all disappears and the resulting decrease in the prices.

    Frankly the planet will be fine, I can’t understand what the Greens are worried about. If we really are screwing everything up then we’ll wipe ourselves out anyway when all out crops fail and so on and the planet can clean up later and repopulate with some other species. If we’re not then all will be well. See win-win for the Greenies. As a bonus if we wipe outselves out we won’t be keeping any pets and all the oppressed puppies can roam free.

    Posted by sam on 2005 12 09 at 10:33 AM • permalink

  24. Andrea - 1. I never said I didn’t like it. On the contrary, it is an excellent example of false positioning, and as such, suited my purpose more than adequately. (I’ve written a book on reasoning and fallacies in thinking.) 2. Was I really that boring? (I submit that I wasn’t given you have responded.) 3. I was quite clear in stating that I found it mildly amusing (hence the wry smile remark - fair enough that you missed that bit I s’pose). 4. If you care to take a look at my “elsewhere” http://humbugonline.blogspot.com/ you’ll agree, I hope, that it lacks “boring pedantry”. Ps - Could you link me to something amusing you’ve written of late?

    Kaboom - thanks for that link - piss funny - I might go for a drive tomorrow - not sure where - just for the hell of it. Q: If, when driving, I take my 6 month pregnant wife, and assuming we are all responsible for the car’s emissions, (even though I’m behind the wheel) what percentage is the foetus responsible for? A: 25% (I’ll let you figure out my maths - hint, in this question the foetus counts as 2/3rds a person.)

    Posted by Humblogger (the Younger) on 2005 12 09 at 10:42 AM • permalink

  25. Friday night!  Awwriiiight!

    In the immortal words of Scarlett O’Hara, I shan’t think of global warming today.  I’ll think of it tomorrow.  After all, tomorrow is another day.

    Posted by RebeccaH on 2005 12 09 at 11:15 AM • permalink

  26. As I’ve said before, I’ll believe in global warming when a swampy can tell me why the Vikings named it “Greenland.” 

    Of course, the Vikings being the original RWDB’s, they were probably being ironic…

    Posted by richard mcenroe on 2005 12 09 at 11:41 AM • permalink

  27. And as Rhett Butler said,: “Global warming? Frankly, my dear, I don’t give a damn.”

    Posted by paco on 2005 12 09 at 12:43 PM • permalink

  28. ...Richard Wood, chief oceanographer at the UK Met Office’s Hadley Centre for climate research in Exeter, says the Southampton team’s findings leave a lot unexplained. The changes are so big they should have cut oceanic heating of Europe by about one-fifth – enough to cool the British Isles by 1°C and Scandinavia by 2°C. “We haven’t seen it yet,” he points out.

    Though unseasonably cold weather last month briefly blanketed parts of the UK in snow, average European temperatures have been rising, Wood says. Measurements of surface temperatures in the North Atlantic indicate a strong warming trend during the 1990s, which seems now to have halted...


    My emphasis.

    I believe the term usually used is “contradictory data”.  The use of the Kyoto Treaty as a club is coming to and end anyway.  The self-declared “virtuous” are having a hard time explaining why their emissions have increased post-treaty signing, which apparently “give renewed urgency to intergovernmental talks in Montreal, Canada, this week on a successor to the Kyoto Protocol.”

    Posted by Winger on 2005 12 09 at 12:55 PM • permalink

  29. Rebecca and Paco:

    Didn’t Scarlett also say something like, “Warm, warm, warm.  Don’t you men ever talk about any else.”

    Fiddle dee dee . . .

    Posted by cosmo on 2005 12 09 at 01:24 PM • permalink

  30. Martinis?

    Martinis cause ‘lobal warming.’

    Posted by cosmo on 2005 12 09 at 01:25 PM • permalink

  31. #29: Very true, Cosmo. And who can forget Buttefly McQueen’s classic line: “Lawdy, Miss Scarlett, I don’t know nothin’ ‘bout signin’ no treaties!”

    Posted by paco on 2005 12 09 at 02:42 PM • permalink

  32. 26 skiff carl McEnroe

    Of course, the Vikings being the original RWDB’s, they were probably being ironic…

    Well, that’s not out of the question.  They called Iceland “Iceland,” after all, and at least there ARE some green spots there.  Relative to Greenland, anyway.  Probably greener than Norway too, come to think of it.  Alls I’m sane is, y’can’t just go by nomenclature.  To give the swampies a real problem, get them to explain how the Vikings grew grapes in Greenland.
    And while they’re at it, what’s their explanation for the shrinking polar icecaps ... ON MARS?  ksnksnksnksnksnk snurk!

    Posted by Stoop Davy Dave on 2005 12 09 at 03:24 PM • permalink

  33. 23 Sam at the coffee machine

    The Greenies don’t like that because it is a change and their precious Mother Earth can’t cope with change in their small minds.

    Nah.  What the Greenies don’t like is themselves NOT being in charge of the governments and corporations.  As long as somebody else is in charge, and as long as it’s REAL EASY to think up stuff to complain about, then they can be as hypermoralistic and righteous as they like, without all that laborious bother of actually producing anything or governing anything. 
    Perhaps I oversimplify? 
    Not.

    Posted by Stoop Davy Dave on 2005 12 09 at 03:30 PM • permalink

  34. To posit one semi-serious response to the nitpickers: The reason the Glowball Warming crowd is so unintentionally funny to us isn’t because we’re too stupid to figure out that Global Warming might indeed mean that Montreal gets colder and Mombasa gets hotter, but that they would continue to trot out Global Warming as the culprit all the same if things were to reverse in both places tomorrow.

    Posted by PW on 2005 12 09 at 03:32 PM • permalink

  35. then they can be as hypermoralistic and righteous as they like, without all that laborious bother of actually producing anything or governing anything.
    Perhaps I oversimplify? 

    No, I’d say that’s pretty much it.

    Posted by Dave S. on 2005 12 09 at 04:31 PM • permalink

  36. #18 Of course, you should be aware that it is men who cause global warming, not women.

    I fully expected to read a contention that men contribute more….because we fart more than women!!

    Give us our due, ladies!

    Posted by rinardman on 2005 12 09 at 04:32 PM • permalink

  37. The UK (alleged) Conservative have gone moonbat:

    “David Cameron, the new Conservative leader, has pledged to take the “tough decisions” needed to cut greenhouse gas emissions by 60 per cent by 2050.
    Mr Cameron has appointed environmentalist Zac Goldsmith as joint head of a new policy group looking at quality of life issues.

    Mr Goldsmith, a leading anti-globalisation campaigner, ...”

    Posted by jorgen on 2005 12 09 at 04:34 PM • permalink

  38. I agree with PW.  As I’ve said on related threads in the past (and as ekw says above), what bothers me about global warming theory isn’t that it might cause paradoxical effects, it’s that any change, in any direction, at any time is trotted out as proof of global warming.

    Posted by jic on 2005 12 09 at 04:38 PM • permalink

  39. The UK (alleged) Conservative have gone moonbat

    Maybe, maybe not.  It’s easy to make pledges this far from an election.

    Posted by jic on 2005 12 09 at 04:42 PM • permalink

  40. Words to look up in the dictionary:

    1.  officious
    2.  entropy
    3.  colloquy
    4.  tautology

    I wonder, should I use my Strine dictionary?

    Officious - mean, nasty - “That’s officious croc right there, mate!”

    Entropy - urethra (Wog-Australian) - “That’s a da en’ tro’ pee.”

    Colloquy - intestinal distress in an infant - “Strooth, that sheila’s lad is ‘owling like a bogan at a piss-up. Must be colloquy, eh?”

    tautology - instructed in an unremembered field -

    “Oi taught ‘ology for thi’ty yeahs at Uni.”

    “What kind of ‘ology, mate? Biology? Paleontology?”

    “Dunno. Cain’t remember. Oi was piss-drunk the ‘ole bloody time.”

    Posted by Dave S. on 2005 12 09 at 04:52 PM • permalink

  41. Humblogger, the reason I didn’t reply to you is because I live on the other side of the globe from Australia and I had to go to my day job. Also, I have a life, and I am not interested in reading your blog. By the way, don’t use these comments simply to advertise for your own site. If you want to advertise on Tim’s site, contact him about buying a blog ad.

    Posted by Andrea Harris, Administrator on 2005 12 09 at 05:09 PM • permalink

  42. As Jic has reiterated, Greens have some Earth-fundamentalist view that there was once, at some unspecified time, a perfect Rousseauian world where nothing ever changed and everything just remained in perfect stasis. Which, of course, goes against every single scientific law ever discovered. Nothing ever remains the same but changes over time. Must change over time. Seen in that light, environmental fundamentalism is a religion where people believe in their self-created mythology: the Garden of Eden, Goddess/Gaia worship, the Fall of Man, etc.

    Greens don’t just hate all human activity, they hate all humans including themselves because they see us as complicit in global destruction. That’s why they try and hunker down in hemp underwear and eat ground rope (also a religious concept, it’s their version of sackcloth and ashes: they’re doing penance). But there is a more insidious angle to Green fundamentalism: Anti-capitalism. David Horowitz said it a long time ago: the environmental movement is the new home of the old Left.

    Posted by ekw on 2005 12 09 at 06:25 PM • permalink

  43. Spot on ekw, I’ve long listened as the environ-mental ‘thinking class’ associated human population with all the woes in their lexicon of Gaia-oppressing evil.

    Extrapolate the logical conclusion from environ-mentalist rhetoric and greeny actions and it resolves quite readily into why the ‘movement’ typically self-identifies with the far left, Anarchism, and/or any other luddite group that espouses an anti-globalist, anti-business, and/or anti-consumer agenda. After all, from Freon to farts, we sheeple are to blame for the intolerable entropy that assails the glorious navel gazing stasis of their primitivist fantasy worlds.

    It goes a long way toward explaining why the essential actions of the Sudanese government, The Rwandan Hutus, Pol Pot, The Korean Kim Ils, Stalin, and various sundry killbot misleaders like Saddam don’t seem to particularly bother them to the point of taking to the streets in protest - much less inspiring the collective balls to support braver people’s fight against. Instead we see the chatterers champion insanities such as human shields for Saddam and culture wars against moral frameworks that have evolved to allow human society to both live long and prosper.

    To coopt Occam - “Pluritas non est ponenda sine necessitate”

    “Nature likes things as simple as possible.”

    The hardcore swampy’s ideal societal end-state invariably involves a massive reduction in human population. Their root philosophical goal necessarily embraces totalitarian control and malarial deathwishes because they’ve gotta realize that we peskily breeding humans kinda like life, and kids, and physical comfort and won’t willingly follow their nihilistic siren call.

    One thing we can count on in this postmodern world is that our Gaian betters will continue to give aid and comfort or a Security Council pass to any third party actor that works toward the final [green] solution. Crowd control and simplisme with 50% less sublimated guilt.

    Well Fuck them!
    I’m heading out for a beer.

    Posted by monkeyfan on 2005 12 09 at 08:38 PM • permalink

  44. Hahaha—Gulf Stream stalls—Vermont gets warmer and France gets colder.

    Excuse me, but there must be some light bulb in my house that needs to be switched on.

    Posted by HelenW on 2005 12 09 at 09:18 PM • permalink

  45. ekw, monkeyfan, excellent posts!  Too bad we can’t get those published as a dissertation, perhaps titled “Common Attributes of Lefties, Environmentalists, and Brutal Dictators”.

    Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 2005 12 09 at 09:46 PM • permalink

  46. Do I get the impression Humblogger is blustering a lot of humbug?

    As for Glowball Vorming, I might waste some time working out precisely when this lunatic idea gained currency.

    The Greenies position is that once you have fallen through the ice into the coooold water, are then rescued in a state of cold blueness, and are then warmed up to get back to living, then this is bad.

    Same with the earth, it’s the ice ages which are the killers, not the return to climate optimum conditions. Its not warming that is abnormal but cooling which is the problem. All biological processes slow down with reduced temperature.

    Greenies are simply stupid.

    Posted by Louis on 2005 12 09 at 10:09 PM • permalink

  47. This is not a very articulate comment, but global warming is utter bullshit.

    Posted by Major Anya on 2005 12 09 at 11:46 PM • permalink

  48. That’s OK, Darlene…..if you have any vermouth.

    Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 2005 12 10 at 12:08 AM • permalink

  49. Glowball Vorming

    Wasn’t that a garage band in Biloxi back in the ‘70s?

    Hey, and leave the Greenies alone, you’re mocking their religion.  It has to be one, you know…no one can believe that stuff without blind faith against all reason.

    Posted by trainer on 2005 12 10 at 12:08 AM • permalink

  50. Louis, I remember Time magazine devoted a feature to it in 1987 or 1988 with all sorts of preposterous predictions, like five degrees increase in worldwide temperatures and sinking Pacific islands, that haven’t come to pass. It’s been around almost 20 years and nothing has changed. Sorry, everything has changed. Bloody climate, it’s got a habit of doing that.

    Posted by slatts on 2005 12 10 at 12:21 AM • permalink

  51. Louis, I remember Time magazine devoted a feature to it in 1987 or 1988 with all sorts of preposterous predictions, like five degrees increase in worldwide temperatures and sinking Pacific islands

    Hell, ten years before that they said we’d be buried under 30 feet of ice. Did the ‘87 article come with a retraction? Ha Ha, I slay myself…

    Posted by Dave S. on 2005 12 10 at 12:48 AM • permalink

  52. While we’re speaking of this stuff, I think we need a short background check. The Holocene - 14,000 years ago up to today:

    Climatologists call this period the Climatic Optimum. During the climatic optimum many of the Earth’s great ancient civilizations began and flourished. In Africa, the Nile River had three times its present volume, indicating a much larger tropical region.

    ...The period 900 - 1200 AD has been called the Little Climatic Optimum. It represents the warmest climate since the Climatic Optimum. During this period, the Vikings established settlements on Greenland and Iceland. The snow line in the Rocky Mountains was about 370 meters above current levels. A period of cool and more extreme weather followed the Little Climatic Optimum. A great drought in the American southwest occurred between 1276 and 1299. There are records of floods, great droughts and extreme seasonal climate fluctuations up to the 1400s.

    These periods of warming - an ongoing retreat from the last Ice Age - were called optima because they had advantages for humans. Most of the world still believes that this is a good thing, but the Greens cast the whole argument in a them or us, black/white, with us or against us scenario (exactly what they accuse G. Bush of doing). Nonetheless, it seems clear to me that temperatures should optimally go higher to do the greatest good for the greatest number. That used to be a cornerstone liberal position. How the Left has fallen from that ideal.

    Posted by ekw on 2005 12 10 at 12:58 AM • permalink

  53. Dave S., got any vermouth…..?

    Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 2005 12 10 at 03:07 AM • permalink

  54. 41: Hi Andrea - Fair enough. I actually wasn’t attempting to advertise, I thought you’d find some amusement, but in hindsight I guess it comes across that way - my apologies. My reply is tardy as I went for that drive… To be fair to the greenies, it was bloody hot today, great weather for the beach, keep it coming.

    Posted by Humblogger (the Younger) on 2005 12 10 at 03:34 AM • permalink

  55. It’s Saturday arvo now and I’ve been thinking about this post all day—and worrying.

    Is the singular of “martini” a “martinus”?

    Posted by BIWOZ on 2005 12 10 at 05:05 AM • permalink

  56. #18 Of course, you should be aware that it is men who cause global warming, not women.

    Oh, yeah?  Who does more screaming in the argument?  All that hot air’s gotta go somewhere…

    Is the singular of “martini” a “martinus”?

    There is no such thing as a single martini.  As Nick and Nora.

    Posted by richard mcenroe on 2005 12 10 at 02:36 PM • permalink

  57. I was thinking about the singular of martini but never having ordered anything but doubles I think there is no singular form, as richard mcenroe suggests. I mean, do you want them to do the job or what? Who wants to be half-pasted, or, conversely,  who wants to drink twelve singles when you can reach the state of mind which approximates the inside of a lava lamp with six doubles?

    Posted by ekw on 2005 12 10 at 05:12 PM • permalink

  58. All that hot air’s gotta go somewhere…

    This makes me wonder whether the all-seeing, all-knowing climate models used by these quasi-religious types account for all the hot air generated by hippies whining about global warming. Perhaps the best emissions abatement tool would be duct tape over the mouths of environmentalists.

    I also wonder if they account for the additional emissions arising from the international travel associated with their vitally important conferences and meetings. I’ve heard estimates that 10,000 to 17,000 delegates attended the UN gabfest in Montreal. Ironically, their best chance of reducing so-called greenhouse emissions would have been to cancel the thing.

    Posted by Art Vandelay on 2005 12 11 at 12:41 AM • permalink

  59. Thursday afternoon travelling home I heard that Tasmania has decided to adopt the teaching of Global Warming (or was that Climate Change) in schools because some academic climatologist (Dr Jackie W… oops forgot the surname), has decided as it’s her pet project (and she prolly gets shitloads of money from the government to hold her view), after conducting a survey in schools and discovering that the kids didn’t know that much about Global Warming. I tried to find something about it on the web but haven’t been successful.

    And men do contribute the most to global warming. Women Ladies don’t fart.

    (teehee)

    Posted by kae on 2005 12 11 at 11:45 PM • permalink

  60. kae,

    Read my post #53. Click the link. There are many places on the Net to find out about Global Warming. Just remember that a lot of them are run by people whose agenda is to promote a disaster scenario and to blame the U.S. Try and find the site which adheres closely to what is scientifically known, not what is assumed only through computer modeling (notoriously wrong) or through political posturing. A lot of data seem very reasonable, but often data are cherry-picked from an array of different sources and then put forth as scientific certainty. Careful of this as it’s done very convincingly by highly-educated and trained activists. Not all scientists are objective, many have the same political agenda as the militant environmentalists and do not shrink from bending these data to fit preconceived outcomes. 

    Also, look for meteorologists who discuss solar activity and weather patterns. There is a strong possibility that solar activity is the main source for global warming and cooling, particularly sun spot activity. Good luck.

    Posted by ekw on 2005 12 12 at 12:15 AM • permalink

  61. Page 1 of 1 pages

Commenting is not available in this weblog entry.

Members:
Login | Register | Member List

Please note: you must use a real email address to register. You will be sent an account activation email. Clicking on the url in the email will automatically activate your account. Until you do so your account will be held in the "pending" list and you won't be able to log in. All accounts that are "pending" for more than one week will be deleted.